9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 861X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r back to the Tribunal to decide the issue de novo - 108,109, 110,111,115 - - - Dated:- 13-11-2009 - SATISH CHANDRA DR., J. DR. SATISH CHANDRA J. All the revisions have been filed by the assessees under section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, against the different judgment/order passed by the U.P. Trade Tax Tribunal, Lucknow, for the assessment years mentioned above. Since the controversy involved in the abovementioned revisions is almost identical along with the facts and circumstances, all the revisions are decided by this common order. In all the revisions, during the assessment years under consideration, the assessees were engaged in the manufacture and sale of rice. Each assessee was enjoying the eligibility certi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of raw material, i.e., paddy. To this effect, the Commissioner has issued a circular No. 554 dated July 22, 2004. He further submitted that on the basis of the circular and statutory provisions, the assessees have moved necessary applications claiming the benefit under section 4BB but in a few cases, the assessing officer has rejected the application filed by the assessee. However, in some cases, the assessing officer has allowed the claim of the assessee but the same was recalled. Being aggrieved, the assessees have filed the first appeal before the first appellate authority who has allowed the claim of the assessee. Not being satisfied, the Department has filed an appeal before the Trade Tax Tribunal who vide its impugned order has allowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... member who was the part of the Division Bench of the Tribunal has denied the said benefit to the assessees. It may be mentioned that similar matters must receive the similar treatment as per the ratio laid down in the following cases: 1. Diksha Suri v. ITAT [1998] 232 ITR 395 (Delhi). 2. Union of India v. Paras Laminates Pvt. Ltd. [1990] 186 ITR 722 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramamurthi (L. G.) [1977] 110 ITR 453 (Mad). The co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal must follow the earlier decision as per the ratio laid down in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Travancore Titanium Products Ltd. [2004] 265 ITR 526 (Ker). The honourable Supreme Court in the case of Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. Commissioner of Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
